Analysts Warned of Iraq War's high Cost

[leftchick]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20031101/ap_on_go_co/iraq_war_costs&cid=512&ncid=1480

<snip>"The problem is, the administration didn't ever publicly come up with how many troops they thought would be there, or how long they would be there," said Steven Kosiak, an analyst with the nonpartisan Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. "It's not that difficult to estimate what the costs will be if you have some idea of the numbers of troops."

On Friday, the Congressional Budget Office released a report estimating the total cost to occupy Iraq from 2004 through 2013 at between $85 billion and $200 billion, depending on how many American soldiers are needed and how soon they can leave Iraq.

Rumsfeld defended the Pentagon's pre-war vagueness at an October news conference, saying: "We were criticized for not giving answers because we didn't know the answer."

Former White House economic adviser Larry Lindsey also came under fire last year when he estimated a war with Iraq could cost between $100 billion and $200 billion. Mitch Daniels, then Bush's budget chief, discounted the estimate as "very, very high," and the issue was cited as one of the reasons why Lindsey resigned in December.

[HFishbine]

1. Costs?

"estimating the total cost to occupy Iraq from 2004 through 2013 at between $85 billion and $200 billion..."

Considering that we are 50% of way to the high end of that estimate at 8 months out of a projected 108 months, I'd say this "estimate" is propaganda.

[izzie]

2. Well Russia said that we would spend out selfs to defeat.

60B first part of this year and now 87B it makes a good start After all Bush must get in a second term. Things are going to get bad.Like this grouth. It is arms and one time tax refund. Easy to see we are going to arm the world so we can then fight them and so on. That type of country does not last.